The Debian Telemetry Box 34
SquadBoy writes "The fine people at Debian have created a Telemetry Box Distribution this is what they have to say about it. "Version 1.0 of the Telemetry Box Distribution has finally been released. The Tbox distribution is a Debian GNU/Linux 'potato' based custom Linux version for remote monitoring and maintenance of networks. A telemetry box allows remote management and diagnostics. It uses a customized version of netsaint to gather data. Netsaint has been enhanced so that the configuration is possible via the Tbox Webinterface through SQL structures. Netsaint logs into a SQL table. Tools on the Tbox can then display the data in a variety of ways (graphs or reports)."" Storie's a bit old, but it's a cool little box.
Re:Version Number Inflation? (Score:1)
Re:Debian sucks (Score:1)
Re:for network monitoring... (Score:1)
Cricket was originally written for WebTV Networks, Inc. It was subsequently publically released under the GNU General Public License. Without the full support of WebTV's management, Cricket would still be an internal tool.
I'm guessing that this was before M$ bought them out. Wow, I guess WebTV was useful for something besides getting grandmothers to use the internet! =) It would be great if more companies did this. Just about every place has their own in-house tools that were written to support some business function that couldn't be solved with existing Free or proprietary software.
Re:Version Number Inflation? (Score:1)
Why 0.1? Why not 0.0000000001? Version numbering is completely arbitrary. Just ask RMS or whoever decided that Emacs would skip about 10 whole versions several years back. And then look at Debian's apt-get tool, which is very solid and robust, and it's only on version 0.3.19 or something. It's meaningless.
noah
Re:Sigh (Score:1)
that is not a url, it doesn't have a protocol specifier
This sucker rocks! (Score:1)
1: Install qpage
2: Hook up a modem
3: Stride briskly away
I'd much rather do that than hand over monitoring to a third party. Very cool system.
you are so wrong. (Score:1)
1.) it's not us doing the monitoring. this breaks most security policies within any company of a large enough size, as well as just being bad form all around.
2.) as I mentioned, when you have arrays of firewalls between you and the net, it's really quite pointless to ask someone to monitor your systems, now isn't it?
When are all you little kids going to start understanding the world doesn't revolve around your bandwidth wasting napster using asses? it disgusts me.
Re:Sigh (Score:1)
I like it (Score:1)
Overall, I'm impressed. It is a nice bundle and only takes 15 minutes to install (if you have fairly standard hardware).
"Storie"? (Score:1)
Re:Sneak Netsaint in the Front Door (Score:1)
It really gives you a good "feeling" on how the networks performs.
It also has a very good, and steady development cycle, and a good roadmap for future enhancements.
The nice thing about the web-interface is, that it makes it easy to show (management) what Netsaint is all about.
So you quite right. No need to sneak in Netsaint, it is that good.
If you need to monitor Internet traffic, the Ntop (www.ntop.org) is a really slick and impressive package, that looks like it cost XXXX$. It is in furious development, so it isn't ready for production yet, unlike Netsaint. But if you need something like it, it is worth to keep an eye on.
We plan to deploy it within the next mont or so; since we have a managed Cisco switch, we will use CPAN to duplicate the port running to the router, and lead it into a locked down box in the DMZ. That way we can sniff & map network traffic between LAN and Internet, without running a daemon on the actual firewall.
Regards
Peter H.S.
Re:Version Number Inflation? (Score:1)
Re:Sigh (Score:1)
Yeah, fine, web-interfaces "lack the power of the command line", so does EVERY OTHER GUI. That's why I said you can throw on the ssh server. And yeah, it does "lack all the ease of use of a convential gui application." That's kinda the price you pay for a web-app, and one that isn't bandwidth hungry. If you want to use XDMCP, go for it, but that's a LOT of bandwidth to use for monitoring a network. Half the packets you'd be sniffing would be your own traffic...
Anyway, I just tend to ignore the corporate buzzwords. It looks like a cool box,
Justin Dubs
Sneak Netsaint in the Front Door (Score:1)
But I digress.
We're trying to develop a system/performance mgmt/monitoring system right now for our infrastructure. Without a truckload of time and cash, it's a real pain on NT. However, NetSaint + Linux is cake (set it up tonight w/ not too much trouble) and it's *free*, which ought to be a very good reason to use it in light of our recent layoffs. With the plug-ins capability, we can make it do exactly what we need very quickly. I haven't found that ability on a non-Unix platform yet.
I'll be showing my manager this combination on Monday.
Woohoo!
Stephen
for network monitoring... (Score:1)
if you haven't used it, it's worth a look for sure. it does network and machine monitoring and is highly configurable.
gol
Re:Carnivore? (Score:1)
Re:Debian sucks (Score:1)
Re:Version Number Inflation? (Score:1)
Can you imagine. . . (Score:1)
Bad cli considered harmful (Re: Sigh) (Score:1)
You get a few winners (JuniperOS, IOS) - but the vast majority of network device CLIs are like the TNT or Portmaster or PowerRail or anything from Netgear or... There is some excellent equipment out there limited by a bad (or barely adequate) CLI.
The direction we've taken on our in-house software is to have an internal set of management functions and add interfaces as needed. That way snmp, cgi, cli, and any buzzword enabled technology that may come up, will be consistent.
Our first tier NOC folks seem to love the web interfaces we have available. I can't stand them myself, but my job does not involve sitting around waiting for things to break.
Sigh (Score:1)
Let's be honest, nobody has even figured out how to make a decent web interface to email, much less system monitoring. Why won't people just give it a rest already and realize that web interfaces, while useful for times when you don't have your laptop, are completely unsuited as a primary interface to any application.
Oh well, at least it's not java.
--Kara
Only 50 MB? (Score:1)
WebTelemetry Rocks (Score:1)
Re:Sigh (Score:2)
No - It does have a command line version. The Web Interface is an extended feature, you can disable it if you want.
No they haven't (Score:2)
This is a customized version of Debian created by the people at siteROCK [siterock.com]. Debian developers may have been involved but it isn't an official Debian project.
-- Jaldhar
Re:Sigh (Score:2)
Basically, Netsaint is daemon, which through various plugins (premade or your own scripts), monitors your network. The plugins are just CLI programs or scripts. Netsaint either performs active service checks; e.g. the "check_pop3" plugins log into the pop3 server, and check if it works, or passive checks; the remote host delivers the result of a service check to the netsaint monitoring host. Of course, one can also perform remote checks through OpenSSH, if you don't want to run a deamon on the remote host, or the function one wants to monitor isn't a service as such (load average etc).
The results of these checks goes into a standard text logfile (just grep and awk). But the strong point of Netsaint is not so much its ability to monitor services, but in its handling of the service checks:
E.g.: if the pop3 doesn't work after 3 tries, and it is a working day, during business hours, send me a mail, and page me asap. If it is weekend, just send me a mail, but both mail and page Poor Joe.
If I haven't responded to the problem within X hours, escalate the problem to this list of people.
If the pop3 goes back online again, send me a mail too.
Or: if the 5 min load average during business hours goes above 1.5, write a warning in log, but don't mail me. If the 15 min load average goes above 2.0 mail me. If it goes above 3.0, write "Slashdot effect" in the logfile, and mail everybody on this list, turn on the sprinkler system, and dial out using this modem, on this spare POTS, and leave a naughty message on cowboyneals telephone answering machine.
Of course, one can also mointor and check whether the service checks are performed or not.
In short, Netsaint can monitor all kinds of events, and has a rather powerfull way of dealing with these events, and none of this is in any way, dependent on the web interface. This is mostly used for viewing log-files, or give one a quick overview of the health and status of the network. It is nice, but not neccesary.
So in this case, your "web interace prejudice" isn't warranted;-)
I somewhat agree with you, that web interfaces, as a primary interface, usually feels clunky and sluggish. But web interfaces can be quite usefull, not perhaps for the Sysadmin himself, but because it means that he can delegate rutine stuff to lesser mortals, like adding or removing users, managing mail lists etc., without exposing the l^Husers to anything "complicated", and at the same time, easily restrict them to only the small and limited subset of priviliges they need to perform the job.
Now, this Tbox looks very good. It is yet another reason, for "sneaking" in a Linux box on the network, or sell as a service; it is nice as a consultant or sysadmin to have good diagnostic logfiles, when the costumer calls in, and says "the Internet isn't working".
And better still, since Netsaint is pro-active, call your costumer in the morning, saying "Your
Everybody loves screenshots, so check_url www.netsaint.org
Regards
Peter H.S.
Carnivore? (Score:2)
Hmmm... (Score:2)
Version Number Inflation? (Score:2)
Re:Why a customized version of netsaint? (Score:2)
WebTelemetry Better Alternative (Score:2)
Re:for network monitoring... (Score:3)
Check out http://cricket.sourceforge.net/ [sourceforge.net]
noah
Re:Sigh (Score:3)
No - It does have a command line version. The Web Interface is an extended feature, you can disable it if you want.
Re:Hmmm... (Score:4)
For you maybe... for (insert company/organization with big network here) not. If your company relies on those network/service monitoring boxes, they'd better be stable and left to their job. For these applications, a dedicated monitoring box is probably the best way to go, since you can just install it and put a big 'do not disturb' sign on the console. With hardware prices being what they are now, this will save you both time and money, since it makes management of the monitoring infrastructure a whole lot easier...